Monarch delays & Compensations. Listed flights denied in O.P.

NoviceAngel

glentoran99 wrote: »

It seems monarch are requesting that cases be stayed on the basis they have 900 odd litigated claims, they also however throw in a few lines about ambiguity in decisions etc just to try and throw a spanner in the works

What's the number of the cases got to do with anything ? So because they have a huge number of claims, they should all remain stayed? Utter rubbish!

'Ambiguity' What ?

I fail to see any ambiguity when the Supreme Court stated


"The Court ordered that permission to appeal be refused in Thomson because the application does not raise an arguable point of law; [and] permission to appeal be refused in Jet2.com because the application does not raise a point of law of general public importance and, in relation to the point of European Union law said to be raised by or in response to the application, it is not necessary to request the Court of Justice to give any ruling, because the Court's existing jurisprudence already provides sufficient answer."

It's just another stalling tactic, there is no ambiguity whatsoever!

NoviceAngel

batman44 wrote: »

If nothing by the end of next week then a NBA goes in, I will take them on in court and show the judge all the correspondance, they have had more than enough time.

I think you've given them enough time m8, I'd get the NBA in now.

I'd love to read Monarchs letter to the Courts, requesting that cases remain stayed!

glentoran99

NoviceAngel wrote: »

What's the number of the cases got to do with anything ? So because they have a huge number of claims, they should all remain stayed? Utter rubbish!

'Ambiguity' What ?

I fail to see any ambiguity when the Supreme Court stated


"The Court ordered that permission to appeal be refused in Thomson because the application does not raise an arguable point of law; [and] permission to appeal be refused in Jet2.com because the application does not raise a point of law of general public importance and, in relation to the point of European Union law said to be raised by or in response to the application, it is not necessary to request the Court of Justice to give any ruling, because the Court's existing jurisprudence already provides sufficient answer."

It's just another stalling tactic, there is no ambiguity whatsoever!

Think it was the coa but one of them said the words along the lines off 'it's not without difficulty' and that the wording is ambiguous, that's the bit they are quoting, however they "seem" to be indicating they will pay eventually though

NoviceAngel

glentoran99 wrote: »

Think it was the coa but one of them said the words along the lines off 'it's not without difficulty' and that the wording is ambiguous, that's the bit they are quoting, however they "seem" to be indicating they will pay eventually though

Thanks for that, yes the CoA did say words to that effect, but ultimately ruled in favour of the passenger, the Supreme Court, then refused permission to appeal again ruling in favour of the passenger.

Monarch have no wriggle room left now, what's the point in delaying paying claims now? It will only further damage Monarchs own reputation.

glentoran99

I think they ultimately want to get the opportunity to settle out of court potentially saving millions in costs and interest

111KAB

As the Monarch 'six week period' expires in just over a weeks time I recommend you submit your NBA/LBA (notice before action/letter before action) NOW.

You should allow Monarch 14 days to respond and on or around 17th December you should decide one of three things,

1) Walk away, forget it and let Monarch win
2) Submit a court claim yourself after reading Vauban's excellent guide or
3) Appoint a no win no fee firm and advise them you submitted a NBA/LBA 14 days earlier.

If you continue to play email/letter ping-pong with Monarch you will get continually fobbed off. Monarch have presumably threatened you that should you proceed with court action within the stated 6 week period they will not hesitate to show the judge a copy of their letter. I hardly think a threatening letter dated October 2014 when presented in court in say June 2015 is going to win Monarch any points.
Monarch are now saying they have a stack of claims being considered (possibly true to their abysmal delay record) and that there is some uncertainty regarding technical problems/extraordinary circumstances. This is total rubbish. Since end October (ie around 5 weeks) I have only read of 2 cases being settled so at this rate i.e. one case every 2.5 weeks it will take Monarch 48 years to sort out the 1,000 cases they state they have never mind new ones that appear every day.
You owe it to yourself and your fellow delayed passengers to start gunning now!

Flightclaim

I've just posted a letter from Monarch asking for the stays to remain in the main forum

NoviceAngel

Flightclaim wrote: »

I've just posted a letter from Monarch asking for the stays to remain in the main forum

Just been reading it, it's a disgrace and is VERY similar to the letter J2 wrote to the courts.

Let's hope the Courts don't go along with it, they have had plenty of time to deal with Claimants, they don't really have anything to review, any case stayed by Monarch was either related to Dawson/Huzar as both appeals have been dismissed all they need to do is arrange suitable payment of the claims, does this really require a further three month stay?

Basically, if I read it right, Monarch want a stay because they can't deal with 900 claims, that they themselves have stayed.

Pathetic!

batman44

Within 10 mins of me arrivng home from work tonight my NBA shall be on it's way to Monarch via email.

111KAB

This post basically supports the situation that if you want your compensation out of Monarch you have to instigate Court action unless you want to play correspondence ping pong, get delayed (again!) then get rejected.

https://www.facebook.com/MonarchComplaints/posts/348763175285072